The Punjab State Consumer Commission has directed the Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) to pay Rs 26.50 lakh, the additional accident insurance benefit claimed by the family of a Moga businessman murdered in 2020, ruling that a pre-planned murder alone is not enough to reject the claim. The family had sought the money under four policies after the LIC paid the basic death benefit but refused the additional payout. The commission also ordered Rs 50,000 towards compensation and litigation expenses.The Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission judicial member H P S Mahal and member Kiran Sibal were hearing an appeal by the businessman’s wife, minor son and mother against the District Consumer Commission, Moga’s dismissal of their complaint on November 29, 2022.“The respondents/OPs have failed to justify the repudiation of the Double Accident Benefit merely on the ground that the murder of the DLA was pre-planned,” the commission said on October 13.Tajinder Singh Kambo was murdered by unidentified assailants while at his shop on July 14, 2020. The LIC maintained that the killing was pre-planned.Why LIC rejected the claimThe four policies carried sums assured of Rs 5 lakh, Rs 10 lakh, Rs 1.60 lakh and Rs 10 lakh. His wife Ripendeep Kaur Kambo was nominee under all four. The LIC paid the basic death benefit but refused the additional payout.In its April 30, 2021, repudiation letter, it relied on social media material and a police closure report, maintaining that the murder was planned and attributed to gangster Sukhpreet Singh, also known as Sukha Gill Lamme, to create terror in the area.The family argued there was no evidence that the deceased was involved in the gangsters’ activities or had provoked the attack. It relied on an LIC circular dated October 15, 2007, concerning double accident benefit claims.Story continues below this adCommission questions alleged disputeThe LIC relied on a social media post attributed to the alleged assailant, purportedly referring to a dispute with the deceased. However, the commission found that the alleged dispute was not corroborated by the first information report or the DSP, City Moga’s report. The records did not establish prior threats or communications between the accused and Tajinder Singh.“The intention of the assailants to commit murder and the question whether the resulting death falls within the meaning of accidental death under the insurance policies are two distinct matters,” the commission said.It held that a pre-planned criminal act did not automatically mean the additional benefit was not payable. The LIC’s 2007 circular said an accident benefit claim should not be withheld where police records did not suggest the murder was self-provoked or that the claimant had a hand in it.The commission held that LIC had not established that the death fell outside policy coverage or produced an exclusion clause to justify rejecting the benefit. It set aside the district commission’s order, finding deficiency in service.Story continues below this adThe LIC was directed to pay the double accident benefit under the four policies, with 6 per cent annual interest from April 30, 2021, until realisation. It must also pay Rs 50,000 as composite compensation and litigation expenses. The amounts are to be shared equally by the three complainants and paid within 60 days of receipt of the certified order. The family had claimed Rs 26.60 lakh, but the commission did not separately quantify the final amount payable.TakeawayInsurance companies cannot reject a double accident benefit claim merely because the policyholder’s murder was pre-planned. Nominees should ask the insurer to justify the rejection under the policy terms and examine whether the evidence supports the insurer’s decision.Consumers facing similar grievances may contact the consumer helpline in their respective states (Punjab: 1800-425-1082) or dial the National Consumer Helpline at 1915 for assistance.Don’t miss out on these stories:Mumbai housing society wins 24-year battle, MHADA ordered to refund Rs 1.22 croreStory continues below this adInsurer rejects claim over ‘concealed BP, diabetes’, widow secures Rs 15 lakh payoutThree stranded at Delhi airport: Travel agency, airline told to pay Rs 1.33 lakh